The breakdown of the MoU between Iran and the United States does not come as a surprise. It was structurally designed as such. The main questions remained unresolved in this agreement – Gaza and the two-state solution through the establishment of Palestine. Israel conspicuously remained absent from the framework. How could an agreement last when half of the parties involved in the conflict remained dissatisfied with its contents?

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte's support for US action against Iran is a remarkable development. On 3 July, US intelligence warned Poland of a Russian attack and a possible ground invasion from Belarus or from Kaliningrad Oblast – a Russian exclave on the Baltic Sea, sandwiched between NATO and EU members Poland and Lithuania.

At the recent NATO summit in Ankara, Trump also brought up the Greenland question. Both statements certainly pressured NATO members, including Britain and France, who have pledged to send their vessels to maintain the southern corridor in the Strait of Hormuz along the Omani coast. Germany has also shown an intention to join them. These moves by the erstwhile reluctant Europeans to join the US campaign against Iran ostensibly stem from these two factors.

At the NATO summit, Trump also appreciated Turkish President Tayyip Erdoğan for staying out of the conflict in the Middle East. Trump's agreement to supply F-35 jets and their engines to Turkey could be a reward for this gesture from........

© The Friday Times